ABSTRACT
Veronica, Agustin. 2016. The Interruption Used by The Participants in Ini Talk
Show on Net TV. Thesis. English Department, Faculty of Letters and
Humanities, State Islamic University of Sunan Ampel Surabaya. The Advisor: M. Thoriqussu’ud, M.Pd.
Key Terms: Conversation, Interruption, Participants, Ini Talk Show.
Talk show is a tools of people communicate to convey the important information such as successed, or the phenomenon in society. In a talk show, they using language to start conversation between the host and the guest stars who will talk about a particular topic. Every human being communicate using different languages to achieve the purposes. In this case, the language phenomenon often occurs in a conversation. The language phenomenon often happened in conversation is interruption.
Based on the background above this research investigates the interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on Net TV. The objectives of this reserach are to identify the types and functions of interruption used by the participants in the talk show. This research used descriptive qualitative as a method. The form of the data were utterences that used by the participants in two episodes of Ini Talk Show. The researcher was the primary instrument of this research. The theories that used to analyzing the data are Ferguson (1977), Murata (1983), Kennedy and Camden (1983), Han Z. Li (2001), Zimmermen and West (1975).
INTISARI
Veronica, Agustin. 2016. The Interruption Used by The Participants in Ini Talk
Show on Net TV. Thesis. English Department, Faculty of Letters and
Humanities, State Islamic University of Sunan Ampel Surabaya. The Advisor: M. Thoriqussu’ud, M.Pd.
Key Terms: Conversation, Interruption, Participants, Ini Talk Show.
Talk show adalah sarana orang dalam berkomunikasi untuk menyampaikan informasi-informasi penting seperti kesuksesan, kejadian-kejadian dimasyarakat. Dalam talk show, mereka menggunakan bahasa untuk memulai percakapan antara pemandu acara dan bintang tamu yang akan berbicara tentang suatu topik tertentu. Setiap manusia berkomunikasi dengan menggunakan berbagai bahasa untuk mencapai tujuannya. Dalam hal ini, fenomena bahasa sering terjadi di dalam sebuah percakapan. Fenomena bahasa dalam percakapan yang sering terjadi adalah interruption.
Berdasarkan latar belakang di atas penelitian ini menyelidiki tentang gangguan yang digunakan oleh partisipan dalam Ini Talk Show di Net TV. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi tipe dan fungsi interupsi yang digunakan oleh para partisipan dalam talk show ini. Penelitian ini menggunakan deskriptif kualitatif sebagai metode. Teori-teori yang digunakan untuk menganalisis data adalah Ferguson (1977), Murata (1994), Kennedy dan Camden (1983), Han Z. Li (2001), Zimmermen dan West (1975).
1.1 Background of the Study ... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ... 8
1.3 Objectives of the Study ... 9
1.4 Significance of the Study ... 9
1.5 Scope and Limitation ... 10
1.6 Definition of Key Terms ... 10
2.2.2.1 Cooperative Interruption ... 19
2.2.2.1.1 Agreement ... 20 3.1 Research Approach ... 26
3.2 Instrument ... 26
3.3 Data and Data Source ...27
3.4 Data Collection ...28
3.5 Data Analysis ...29
CHAPTER IV: FINDING AND DISCUSSION 4.1Finding ...35
4.1.1 Type of Interruption ... 37
4.1.1.1 Simple Interruption...37
4.1.1.2 Overlap Interruption ...39
4.1.1.3 Butting-in Interruption ... 42
xii
4.1.2 Function of Interruption ... 48
4.1.2.1 Cooperative Interruption ... 49
4.1.2.1.1 Agreement ... 49
4.1.2.1.2 Assistance ...52
4.1.2.1.3 Clarification ...54
4.1.2.2 Intrusive Interruption...56
4.1.2.2.1 Disagreement ... 57
4.1.2.2.2 Floor Taking ...58
4.1.2.2.3 Topic Change ... 61
4.1.2.2.4 Tangentialization ... 63
4.2 Discussion ... 66
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 5.1 Conclusion ...72
5.2 Suggestion...73
REFERENCES... 75
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
This part introduces the present study. This part of research describes background of study, problem of Study, objective of Study, significance of study, scope and limitation of study, definition of key terms.
1.1 Background of Study
Recently, television is a part of life’s process which leads human being to get the information and entertainment without going to wherever. There are many kinds of Indonesian television programs, for instance; talk show, news, movie, music, and others. Through the programs, people can get the some advantages include get entertainment and education from watching the programs. One of the popular programs is talk show that present by resource person as the guest who speak about something which develop insight to the audience. The people can use the language for some functions that depends on ourself to use language in politness or impoliteness to interact with each other. If people watch talk show, they can see the conversation of their daily life, it is about language phenomenon.
2
to communicate with other not always smoothly, cooperatively, and effortlessly. By language, people has different manners to communicate each other with the purpose.
In Indonesian TV programs, there are many programs talk show for instance; Hitam Putih, Ini Talk Show, Bukan Empat Mata, Mata Najwa, Kick
Andy, Just Alvin, Ada-ada Aja, Rumpi No Secret talk show, and others. Each talk
show program shows the uniques of the program which gives something different with other, to interest the audience watching the talk show. From many kinds of Indonesia talk show programs, the researcher more interest in Ini Talk Show because the language that they use to convey information is very unique. Through the participants conversation, we can see language phenomenon happens during
Ini Talk Showdirectly. One of the phenomenon often happen is interruption, they
uses some jokes to interrupt the speaker, and sometimes also giving the opinion or idea.
Ini Talk Show is one of the most popular Indonesian talk show. The talk
show television that aired on Net Mediatama, which gives many interest programs.
Ini Talk Show is an comedy talk show which is talk about phenomenon that has
3
to give jokes is very creative and inspirative. Then, Andre (Andre Taulay) as co-host, he is a indonesia comedian, singer, and actor also, but he started the carier becomes singer in group band. Besides, the guests who are invited in this program are generally the artist, and the material brought within the scope of the entertianment and matters of public concern in social media.
In the present day, people use language to communicate in daily life. By doing conversation, the people communication each other to some purposes include exchanges about news information, exchange each ideas, question-answer, and others. To convey the information in completely and comfortably, the speakers should understand the sign of turn taking very well. Harwood (2006) states that in authentic conversation, interruptions and overlaps are part of negotiation of turn (cited in Maulidiah, I., et al, 2014:590). The system of turn taking in conversation, when the speaker talk and the other speaker listen. If the speaker cannot manage the speak well, so interruption must happen in the conversation as a violation.
4
Conversation analysis is an appropriate for studying interruption because interruption happens in natural conversation.
Actually, interruption often happens in every human being in the daily conversation. Interruption is an activity that happens when the first speaker begin to talk while the second speaker cuts in the middle word or sentence when the first speaker not finished the talk. Leman, P. J., et al (2010) states that interruption disrupts turn taking in conversation. However, sometimes people are unconcious when they produce interruption in conversation. It is because they enjoy and interested with the topic that speaker talk, it occur because they can not wait the turn of the talk. Nevertheless, the people by doing interruption to cut the rival of speak to take the floor without give opportunity to the rival for continue the speak. It is very violate the speaker because the speaker is still in the turn of the speak. According to Tannen (1991:189), Interruption is an intrusion, a trampling on someone else’s right to the floor, an attempt to dominate. However, someone used interruption to dominate and take the floor the current speaker talk. From this case, it is very important to know for what the speaker and listener doing interruption. At the times, it is necessary they do interruption in conversation for some functions to get communication goals.
5
assumsed that females are cooperative conversationalist. Meanwhile, the males group interactions applied non-supportive interruption, and her assumsed that males are competitive conversationalist.
Second, the research was done by Lawe (2011). She conducted the research to investigated the reason of interruptions used by male and female participants in a Chatholic Youth meeting, and compare about the differences and/or similarities the reason of interruption. Her research found five reasons of interruptions by wardhaugh used both the speakers. Completing is the most-frequent reason of interruption used both male and female participants. In the finding of the research, she concluded that the gender may influence the use of interruption in a meeting. Then, interruption is also used to establish and develop the conversation.
The similarity between Lawe and Pitaramita’s research, these researches study about male and female used interruption. The different between these researches are about the context. Lawe’s research was about comparing the reason of interruption used by male participant and female participant in a mixed-sex meeting, while Paramita’s resarch focusses on use the purposes and frequencies of interruption by male and female students interactions. Different with this research focusses on determining interruption that used by the participants in a talk show. In those previous study above taken data analysis from a meeting in organization. So this research different with those previous research above.
6
transactional and interactional topic. She were taken the data from the conversations of 20 students for each department in an interview. Her finding concluded that are topic and background discipline may influence the use of interruptions by both civil engineering and communication science department students. Besides, the interruption use both the students for trying to complete others saying type in transactional topic may be caused they want to show their agreement, while correcting others words as the most-frequently used type in interactional topic may be caused they want to show their disagreement. So interruption does not necessarily mean to cut and end a conversation, but to establish and develop the conversation.
Fourth, the research about interruption was done by Yessica Hartono (2013). Her research focussed on Interruption and Overlaps occuring in An Indonesian Television Talk Show Indonesia Lawyer Club – Tv One. In the research, she found that there were nine reasons on iterruption done by the host and the panelist. The number of overlaps and interruption done by the host is higher than the guest/penelist. Besides, from the findings, she found that the most frequently of reasons of interruptions produced by the host is breaking up of 7 (29.16%), meanwhile the most frequently of reasons of interruptions produced by the panelists is showing annoyance of 5 (21.7%). For all of the reason, she conclude that interruptions and overlaps in this talk show were not violation.
7
Hartono that related to this present research. The similarities between the present research with Hartono’s research, both of the research uses Indonesia talk show as the object of the research. Besides, many differences between the present research with Hartono’s research. Firstly, Hartono’s research observed about compare the use of overlaps and interruption in Indonesia Lawyer Club Talk Show on TV One, but in present research focusses on the use of interruption in Ini Tlak Show on NET TV. Secondly, Hartono’s research use theory from Wardhaudh (1985) to classification of interruption, meanwhile, the present research use theory from Murata (1994), Kennedy and Camden (1983) to classification functions of interruption. Furthermore, use Ferguson (1977) theory to classification the types of interruption. After learn from the previous research, this present research is to fill the research gaps by investigating the types and functions of interruption that used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on NET TV.
8
explain that to determine whether a speaker is violating another speaker rights, you have know a lot about both speakers and the situation.
The researcher choosesIni Talk Showas the object of the research, firstly, it is one of the most popular talk show in Indonesia shows the uniques performance, because sometimes the participants sing a songs which the lyric from the name of Indonesian traditional food that guided by host. Secondly, the use of interruption often happens in every conversation by the participants. In addition, the use of interruption cause when the other speaker may can not wait the turn of the talk, then the other speaker wants to right’s the word or sentences the speaker talk. Sometimes, the host uses interruption to show the respond to the guests, on the contrary.
So, the researcher is interested in analyzing the participants that used interruption in talk show, because the researcher found that interruption often occur by the participants of the talk show. So, this research very important to analyzing because the finding of the research different from the previous research. So, this research conducted with the titleThe Interruption used by the participants
in Ini Talk Show on Net TV.
1.2 Problems of Study
Based on the background of the problem above, the researcher conducted to answer the following questions:
9
2. What are the function of interruption is used by the partipants in Ini Talk Showon Net TV?
1.3 Objectives of Study
Based on the problem of study, the researcher formulate objectives of this study are:
1. To describe the types of interruption used by participants in Ini Talk Show on Net TV.
2. To explain the function of interruption used by participants in Ini Talk Showon Net TV.
1.4 Significance of Study
The significance of the study will be distinguished into two benefits: 1. Theoritical benefit
The researcher hopes that the research generally to provide a deeper understanding of conversation analysis. particularly, the interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on Net TV. Besides, this research expected to provide knowledge of interruption in the conversation on talk show. On the other words, this research can be references for other researchers who are interested to make research about interruption more depth.
2. Practical benefit
10
become more politeness in conversation. It will help the readears can achieve the specific aim in interruptions use.
1.5 Scope and Limitation of Study
The scope of this research is conversation analysis. This research focuses on interruption that found in the dialogues used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on Net TV. The researcher limits the research on analyzing interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on Net TV, which consists of two episodes (16 Oktober and 27 November 2015). The researcher chooses these episodes, because the guests in these episodes are very interesting; the first, in 16 October 2015, the main guest is an International artist from Indonesia talk about her talent. Second, in 27 November 2015, the main guest is the wife of the Major of Bandung talk about the daily life ofe the Major family. The researcher found interruption uttered by the participants in these episodes. Afterwards, the researcher want to know what the types and the functions of interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on Net TV. Here, the participants means that all of the actors who participate have a role in the talk show.
1.6 Definition of Key Terms
Interruption is when the first speaker process to finishing her or his turn, at that same time another speaker cuts the first speaker speak to gaining a turn for another speaker self. (Zimmerman and West, 1975:195)
11
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This parts will be discusses about the theory that connected with Interruption. To analyze the data, there are some theories will be used by the researcher. the researcher used theory from Ferguson (1977), Murata (1994), Kennedy and Camden (1983), Han Z. Li (2001) to help analysis the data. Then, supported some theories from Zimmerman and West (1975), Tannen (1990), and wardhaugh (1985) to give the definition of interruption. Those theories will help the researcher to answer the research problem.
2.1 Conversation Analysis
Conversation is an interaction between two or more speakers to communicate each other for change information. Paltridge (2007:107) states that conversation is the main way in which people come together, exchange information, negotiate and maintain social relation. Conversation is the way in which people socialize, develop, and sustain their relationship with each other (Liddicoat, 2007). According to wardhaugh (1985:3), conversation is an activity which makes use of many devices in order to reduce the risk to participants. The participants of spoken interaction can be included news interview, doctor-patient consultant, and classrooms interaction.
direct conversation. They are talking about same context with face each other, for examples; conversation in clasroom, and family, which included the speaker and the listener. whereas, non-face-to-face exchanges means that the participants can not direct face each other to do conversation because they are not in same place, for example; in telephone conversation. Furthermore, broadcast material means that the communication uses broadcast as mediator, they are can be face-to-face and non-face-to-face conversation, for example; talk show in television or radio.
According to Paltridge (2007:), conversation analysis comes from the field of sociolgy, thus, it is take a less of a “linguistic” view of spoken discourse than some other forms of discourse analysis. The field of spoken discourse such as adjency pairs, preference organization, turn-taking, interruption, feedback, repair, conversational openings and closings, discourse markers and responses tokens (Paltridge 2006, in Nugroho 2014:11). Conversation analysis has examined aspects of Conversation analysis examined how they are can be organize and develops spoken discourse in conversation.
Conversation analysis is the study of talk in conversation, it means that how people manage the conversation interactions to organize their speaks. Accoding to Sack (cited in Liddicoat, 2007), conversation is characterized by a view of talk as activity through the speaker accomplish thing in interaction.
2.1.1 Interruption
intrusion, a trampling on someone else’s right to the floor, an attempt to dominate (Tannen 1990:189).
According to wardhaugh (1985:150), interruption is a violation of another’s territory or right. It means that when someone interrupt their activity to ask for help of strangers. For example, when a person knocks the door and says “excuse me” it belongs to violating someone’s territory.
According to Zimmerman and West (cited in Tanen 1991:190), ineterruption is a violation in conversation in wich the second speaker begins to speak while the first was in the middle of word or change. It means that interruption happen when the second speaker cuts the first speaker in the middle word without give chance first speaker to finished the word. Here, the example of interruption happens in conversation that given by Zimmerman and West. The following example:
Female : so uh you really can’t bitch when you’ve got all those on the same day (4.2) bu I uh asked my physics professor if I couldn’t chan ge that
Male : Don’t touch
that (1.2) Female : what?
(pause)
Male : I’ve got everything jus’how I want it in that notebook, you’ll screw it up leafin’ through it like that.
speaker give not chance to the first speaker to finished the utterance. The second speaker interrupt the the first speaker because he wants to remind her about something. It is not a violation because he do interruption to certain purpose. Tannen (1991:190) states that interruption is inescapably a matter of interpretation regarding someone right and obligation.
Sack et al. (1974) in zimmerman and west (1975:123) argue that interruption are violation of a current speaker’s right to complete a turn, or more precisely, to reach a possible transition place in a unity-type’s progression. It means that interruption use to help the current speaker for completing the utterance when he or she can not produce the words wants to say, and can reach to develop the topic of the conversation. Covelli and Murray (1980) states that interruption themselves are typically further subdivided into positive or negative (cited in Leman, P.J., et al, 2010).
2.1.1.1 The Types of Interruption
This research, the researcher want to identify the types of interruption. generally, to analyze the type of interruption some researchers used theory from Ferguson (1977), he suggest four types of interruption; simple interruption, overlap interruption, butting-in interruption, and silent interruption (as cited in Beattie, 1982:101-103).
2.1.1.1.1 Simple Interruption
current speaker still finishing the utterance. The second speaker succesed to interrupt the first speaker talk, so the first speaker stop the talk. However, the first speaker listens the second speaker’s talk until finishing the utterance. Then, the first speaker can takes the floor back. The following example by Zimmerman and West (1975:114):
A1: I know what you thought I know you
A2: Ya still see
he anymore?
The example of conversation above that the second speaker (A2) interrupt first speaker (A1). The simple interruption shows when the first speaker can not completing his or her utterance and stop the speak while the second speaker (A2) begin talk. The second speaker (A2) who take the floor can speak completely.
2.1.1.1.2 Overlap Interruption
LG: ... I wonder whether people feel that this is because the Labour Party has run out of some steam. It hasn’t many new ideas.
JC: I think i-,I think it’s because they are,
ah answer to what are, gross over claims by the Consevative Party,...
From the example above shows overlap interruption occur becaouse there is simultaneous speech between the first speaker (LG) and second speaker (JC). The second speaker (JC) interrupt the first speaker (LG) when the second speaker (JC) wants to talk about his opinion about the topic that they are speak. However, the first speaker (LG) can finished the utterance into the last word before the turn taking occure in his turn speak. JC can speak the opinion is completely because LG does not try to take the floor again. Moreover, the second speaker (JC) repeat two word which is same word, it is to make sure that the first speaker (LG) hears his the beginning word who is utterance.
2.1.1.1.3 Butting-in Interruptin
MT: ...if you’ve got the money in your pocket you can choose wether you spend it on things which attract Value Added Tax or not.
DT: You
s-MT: And the main necessities don’t
DT: You say a little
on Value Added Tax.
The conversation above shows the first speaker (MT) inetrrupt the second speaker (DT). The first speaker (MT) who wants to take the floor, but can not speak his opinion completly because the second speaker (DT) successed to takes the floor again. Afterwards, (DT) continue his speak until finished the utterance and seem there is no disruption from other speaker. So, the first speaker (S2) unsuccessesful to take the floor.
2.1.1.1.4 Silent Interruption
S1: So, that time Kang Emil until open (pause)
S2: Break fasting.
The conversation example above shows ther is no simultaneous speech in conversation. The first speaker (S1) pauses the speak when she can not completly the utterance. Afterwards, the second speaker (S2) take the floor to speak her response toward S1 for help completing the word.
2.1.1.2 The Function of Interruption
The function of interruption divided into two categories of interruption such as cooperative interruption and intrusive interruption.
2.1.1.2.1 Cooperative Interruption
1) Agreement
According to Kennedy and Camden (1983), the interrupter understanding and supporting what the first speaker talk. The interrupter shows agreement by doing interruption, sometimes the interrupter explaning the idea related to the topic. The following example by Janice (cited in Tannen, 1991):
P: The part I didn’t like was putting everybody’s snow pants and boots and
M: Oh yeah,that was the worst part.
The example above presents agreement interruption happen in the conversation. It happens when the second speaker (M) interrupt the first speaker (P) while tries to finishing the utterance. The second speaker (M) cuts the first speaker (P) in the middle sentence after she saying “boots”, the she wants to continue and finishing the utterance with say “and”, but the second speaker (M) success takes the floor to showing the agreement about the first speaker (P) talk. Then, the second speaker give opinion to support her agreement.
2) Assistance
Based on Han. Z Li (2001:269) describe that the interrupter perceives that the speaker needs help. It means that when the first speaker can not continue the speak because of forget the word that wants to say, so the interrupter takes the floor to help the first speaker completing the utterance. The interrupter provides the current speaker with a word, phrase, sentence, or idea. The following example cited in Tannen (1991:193):
S: Tongue twister.
The example above shows assistance interruption because the current speaker stop the utterance and can not finishing it. Then, the interrupter interrupt the current speaker to help his or her find the words that wants to say. The interrupter takes the floor by saying “tongue twister”to help completing the current speaker utterance. So, the interrupter successed to interrupt the current speaker utterance but the functions still in positive case.
3) Clarification
According to Kennedy & Camden (1983), this type of interruption is usually initiated by the listener, with the intention to understand the message being sent by the speaker. It means that when the first speaker speak while the second speaker cut in the middle of word to get understand about the word that speaker said. The following example as cited in Tannen (1991):
S: ... We had a TV, but we didn’t watch it all the time. We were very young. I was four when my parents got a TV.
D: You were
four?
forget about the age when he or she wathcing TV firstly. However, it is include successful interruption in positive case.
2.1.1.2.2 Intrussive Interruption
Intrussive interruption is intrusive interruptions pose threats to the current speaker’s territory by disrupting the process and content of the ongoing conversation by Murata 1994 (cited in Han. Z. Li 2001:269). Interussive interruption divided into four kinds, but three types by Murata: disagreement, floor taking, and topic change. Whilst, the last type: tangentialization by Kennedy and Camden 1993.
1) Disagreement
Murata 1994 (in Han. Z. Li 2001:269) states that disagreement happens when the interlocutor in the role of the listener disagrees with what the current speaker is saying and wants to voice his or her opinion immediately, disagreement interruption occurs. It means that interruption happens when the first speaker speak while the second speaker cuts what he or she utterance because to shows disagreement with the first speaker utterance and wants to give opinion or idea. The following example as cited in Tannen (1994):
S1: ‘Cause somebody tells you? Or yor figure it out.
S2: No. Oh..
You you talking about me, or a deaf person.
the current speaker (S1) conveys. However, the interrupter takes the floor to conveys different opinion toward the topic of conversation.
2) Floor taking
According to Murata 1994 (in Han. Z. Li 2001:269), the interrupter interrupt the first speaker because the interrupter wants to develop the topic. The interrupter takes the floor the first speaker does not change the topic but he or she wants to giving the opinion or idea related to the topic. The following example cited in Tannen (1991:204):
P: Throw all the stuff in the dryer and then they’d come in and sit for half an hour
M: And in a little while they’d want to go back out again. The conversation above shows floor taking interruption. It happens whe the interrupter (M) interrupt the current speaker (P) to takes the floor his or her utterance. Then, the interrupter succesed to takes the floor and conveys the opinion until can finishing the utterance. Althouhg, the interrupter disrupt the current speaker with the purpose to takes the floor, but she or he says the opinion still in same topic of conversation. it is include interruption to negative case because the interrupter does not give opportunity the current speaker finishing the utterance.
Murata 1994 (in Han. Z. Li 2001:269) states that in this conversational act, the interrupter is somewhat more aggressive than in the floor-taking situation because he or she has to accomplish the task of changing the topic. It means that the interrupter does not talk about the topic, so he or she interrupt the current speakre to change the topic. The interrupter behaved more aggresive to cuts the talking, so the interrupter succesed to changing the topic. The following example byMurray (cited in Tannen, 1991:191):
H: I think that
W: Do you want some more salad?
The conversation above shows topic change interruption. it is cause that the interrupter (W) interrupt the current speaker (H) with the purpose to change the topic of conversation. the interrupter (W) takes the floor while the current speakre (H) still wants to completing and finishing the utterance but suddenly the interrupter (W) cuts int the middle of word. So, the current speaker can not finishing the utterance.
4) Tangentialization
interrupter does not wants to hear again. The following example cited in Tannen (1991:1999):
M: Oh you mean watching it?
Like-A: ‘Cause I canimagine knowing that sign, and not figuring out that it had anything to do with the decoration. Thye conversation above shows tangentialization interruption. it is happen when the interrupter cuts the current speaker utterance because the interrupter have been understand about the current speaker says. So, the current speaker does not necessary to completing the utterance. Then, the interrupter takes the floor to explain about his or her understanding toward the current speaker means.
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This parts discusses the methodology of the research. The methodology includes of research design, research instruments, data and data sources, data analysis.
3.1 Research Design
This research uses a descriptive qualitative method which focuses on the phenomenon of a word, sentence, and phrase. So it is not focusing on the number of the research. This research uses qualitative research because the form of the data analysis is an explanation and table. The qualitative research that used to identify, classify, and explain the data research. According to Munhall (2007), descriptive qualitative research is not reducible to numbers and categories but it situated in the person’s life and the participant’s words to understand social interaction (cited in Nugroho, 2014:21). Nevertheles, qualitative research is the research aims to understand the phenomenon which description in the form of words and language of what is experienced about behaviours, actions, and others (Moleong, 2015:6). This research, the form of the data is a utterances that analyzed uses interruption. In this case, the writer explains about the interruption that used by the participants.
3.2 Research Instruments
27
an information for clarification, correction, and amplification (Krauss & Peredaryenko, 2013:3). It means that the human position in the research as the instrument for planning, collecting the data, analyzing the data, interpreting the data, and describing the finding of the research. This research instrument uses the researcher herself as the key and the main instrument of this research. The researcher was the only one instrument that involves doing research processes include to collect data, observation the data, analyzed the data, interpreting the data analysis, and describing the finding of the research. Thus, to supporting instrument, the researcher uses a data sheet to help classifying the data analysis.
3.3 Data and Data Sources
The data that used in this research is a form of utterances that contains the interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on Net TV during ongoing conversation. In collecting the data, the researcher classified about the types and functions of interruption in turn to speak.
28
taken supporting data from books, journals, articles, and website related to the topic, then dictionary also.
3.4 Data Collection
According to Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009:189), the technique of data collection in qualitative studies use four categories. These are interviewing, ethnographic observation, document and material culture, and visual analysis. In this research, the researcher use visual analysis because the data analysis is the video of Ini Talk Show in NET TV. This research uses by following techniques to collecting the data:
1. Watch and Listen the video
To collect the data, the researcher watch and listen the video to understand the dialogues by the participants. The researcher watch and listen the talk show many times. The researcher watch and listen two episodes of Ini Talk Show in NET TV for several times to more understand the context the dialogues and to know the parts of the interruption happens.
2. Transcription
To the transcription, the researcher uses two steps: 1) Write in Manual
29
2) Type the transcript
After the hand-written transcript manually, then the researcher retyping the transcript using computer. It aims to the transcript of the data looks neat and easy to understand. By doing this step, the researcher takes a lot to gain the significant data.
3. Coding the data
After transcript the data, the researcher coding the data while correcting the transcript of the dialogues ofIni Talk Show. By coding the data, the researcher using a symbol to mark the use of interruption by the participants in transcript of the dialogues of Ini Talk Show. According to Gail Jefferson (in Zimmerman and West, 1975:128), a symbol “//” to indicates the speaker interruption or overlap by the talk of another. Meanwhile, in this research, the researcher used vertical line “│” to shows the interruption occur by the participants in the transcript of the dialogues ofIni Talk Show. In coding the data, the researcher listens to the talk show and coding the transcription by using vertical line “│” to representing Interruption.
3.5 Data Analysis
30
interruption used by the participants inIni Talk Showon Net TV. In this research, the researcher uses the following technique to analysis data:
3.5.1 Identifying the data analysis from the transcript of the dialogues in Ini Talk Show.
31
Table 1: The Data of Types of Interruption used by the participants
inIni Talk Showon Net TV.
Atalia: Jadi waktu itu Kang Emil itu sampai buka (pause)
Sule: Buka puasa √
Note:
Code: D.94/E.2/T.08:05 – 08:11number of data/episode/time Types of Interruption:
SI: Simple Interruption BU: Butting-in Interruption Ov: Overlaps Interruption SL: Silent Interruption
Table 2: The Data of Functions of Interruption used by the participants inIni Talk Showon Net TV.
C
Atalia: Jadi waktu itu Kang Emil itu sampai buka (pause)
Sule: Buka
32
Note:
Functions of Interruption Cooperative Interruption: AG: Agreement
AS: Assistance CL: Clarification
Intrussive Interruption: DA: Disagreement FT: Floor taking TC: Topic Change TA: Tangentialization
3.5.3 Classifying the data using a table containing the different categorize of types and functions of interruption.
Table 3: The frequency of the functions of Interruption used by the participants inIni Talk Showon Net TV.
No. Types of Interruption Frequency
1. Simple Interruption 23
2. Overlap Interruption 70
3. Butting-in Interruption 7
4. Silent Interruption 13
33
Table 4: The frequency of the functions of Interruption used by the participants inIni Talk Showon Net TV.
Functions of
3.5.4 Interpreting the data to answer the research question based on the context using the theories.
The following example to interpreting the data of the research: 3.5.4.1 Types of Interruption
There are four types of interruption are simple interruption, overlap interruption, buttingin interruption, and silent interruption. In this part, the researcher took one example of four types of interruption.the following example below:
3.5.4.1.1 Silent interruption
The silent of interruption happens when the first speaker pauses a moment, silent interruption not include simultaneous speech because the speaker can not finished the utterance, then the second speaker takes the floor. The following example below:
34
Sule: Buka puasa Atalia: Bukan.
Silent interruption happens when Attalia explain about how her husband (Kang Emil) appreciation to support the team football, then pauses for a while before finished the utterance. Sule then takes the floor to help Atalia get the word that she wants to say, but Sule give the word with his joke.
3.5.4.2 Functions of Interruption
There are two functions of interruption are cooperative and intrusive interruption. Each function has subcategories of function of interruption. In this part, the researcher took example of cooperative interruption.
3.5.4.2.1 Cooperative Interruption
There are three subcategories of cooperative interruption are agreement, assistance, and clariification. The following example below:
1) Agreement
Agreement interruption happens when the second speaker interrupt then takes the floor to show agrrement, understanding, and supporting with the first speaker’s utterence. The second speaker show agreement because his or her interest about the topic that the first speaker brings. The folllowing example below:
Andre: Sesuai dengan mottonya Ibu Wali Kota tadi itu keep mooving be winner
mamang: Betul
35
The agreement interruption happens in the dialogues when Mamang interrupts Andre to show agreement by saying “right”. Previously, Andre say “Appropriate with the motto by Mrs. Major in that past” to insist that Mamang inspirates by the word of Mrs. Major.
CHAPTER IV
FINDING AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, the researcher explains about the finding and the discussion. Also this chapter aims to answer two research problems formulating in the chapter 1.
4.1 FINDING
This part,the researcher explained the finding of the research about types and functions of interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show, an Indonesian talk show in NET TV. This part exists to answer the research problems suitable in chapter I; the first, the researcher described types of interruption in Ini Talk Show. Second, the researcher found the functions of interruption in Ini Talk Show.
This research showed the use of interruptions by the participants in Ini
Talk Show. The data were taken from the dialogues that uttered by the participants
inIni Talk Show.There were 113 data collected in this research. In this part, there
37
Table 5: Frequency of Types of Interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on NET TV.
No. Types of Interruption Frequency
1. Simple Interruption 23
2. Overlap Interruption 70
3. Butting-in Interruption 7
4. Silent Interruption 13
Total 113
The table 5 showed that there were four type of interruptions; simple interruption, overlaps interruption, butting-in interruption, and silent interruption. in this research, the most highest frequency was overlap interruption. the participants inIni Talk Showused overlap interruption which appeared 70 times in two episodes. Then, simple interruption was the second highest frequency which occured 23 times that produced by the participants of Ini Talk Show in two episodes. The next type was silent interruption occurs 13 times. The lowest frequency was butting-in interruption produce by the participants which appeared 7 times in two episodes.
38
4.1.1 Types of Interruption
This part discussed to answer the first research problem about the types of interruption inIni Talk Showon NET TV. According to Ferguson (1977), there are four types of interruption. These are simple interruption, overlap interruption, butting-in interruption, and silent interruption. The four types of interruption produce by the participants in two episodes ofIni Talk Show on NET TV. Each type of interruptions is explained with some examples were taken from the transcript of the dialogues by the participants ofIni Talk Showin this research. 4.1.1.1 Simple Interruption
Silent interruption is a phenomenon that occurs when the interrupter successed to interrupt the current speaker. The interrupter took the floor until the current speaker stop the utterance and can not complete the sentence yet. Afterward, the interrupter took the floor to give the opinion toward the topic of conversation brought. So, the current speaker only listen the interrupter explain about the opinion or idea until finishing the utterance, after that the current speaker can take the floor come back. Simple interruption include the simultaneous speech and there was turn exchange in this type. In this reserach, simple interruption was the second most frequent type occured by the participants in two episodes ofIni Talk Showon NET TV. The frequency of silent interruption which appeared 23 times in two episodes. It was still dominated the use of interruption in this research, because silent interruption in second position. The following example of simple interruption from the dialogues:
39
Langsung foto. Nah, dibawahnya itu
Agnes: Lah, itu biasanya kan misalnya
kalau orang yang pakai kaos yang eee dengan muka eee artis. lah, itu artis juga itu ya?
(D.16/E.1/T.14:51 – 15:05) From the conversation above discussed about the picture that showed in screen, and Sule as the host proposed to Agne as the guest to give commentary. Sule explaied about the picture, and Agnes responded by asking t-shirt that used by someone in picture is a artist or not. In this case, simple interruption happened when Agnes interrupt Sule to add the opinion about sule’s picture in screen, by saying “lah, itu biasanya kan misalnya klau orang yang pakia kaos yang eee dengan muka eeeartis itu artis juga itu ya?”. She did not give the current speaker opprtunity to finishing the utterance. Agnes interrupted Sule while he still wanted to complete the utterance, when he said “Nah, dibawahnya itu”, but Agnes took the floor Sule until he stoped his utterance and could not completing the sentence. However, Agnes intended to show her opinion toward the topic that Sule talk. Sule could take the floor again, after Agnes finishing her utterence completely. So, interruption have done produce by the guest in the conversation.
Sahrul: Ayo, ayo dong! kamu mau ngomong apa? Ini mumpung
Sule: Nih, coba ada
tante Agnesnya, mau ngomong apa?
40
The interruption of the conversation above discussed about Sahrul explain the amazing a Agnes Monica talents, and his son like with Agnes talent. Then, he commanded his son to talk with Agnes directly, as long as Agnes in front of his son. By doing conversation, simple interruption produce by the host. This phenomenon happened when Sule interrupt Sahrul while he stoped with the words “ini mumpung”, it was the interruption appeared beecause Sule began to interrupt with “Nih”. Furthermore, Sule could take Sahrul’s floor with continue his utterance by saying “coba ada tante Agnesnya, mau ngomong apa?”. He did not intend to change the topic of conversation but he wanted to take the floor and said his opinion.
4.1.1.2 Overlap interruption
41
Andre: haduu, kamu kok bisa sempet hadir disini, terimakasih banget ya? Agnes: ya iya lah. Pastinya dong!
Andre: Terimakasih banget. Terimakasih banget,terimakasih banget. Agnes: kalau buat Andre sama Sule harus di sempet-sempetin.
(D.3/E.1/T.02:25 – 02:30)
The conversation above showed overlap interruption that produced by Andre as a co-host in the talk show. Overlap interruption happened when Andre interrupted Agnes as the guest in the talk show while she still keept the talk until completed her utterance, and also the interrupter successed to takes the floor and can finishing the utterance in same times. In this conversation, overlap interruption happened when Agnes still completed the utterance by saying “pastinya dong!”, in the same time, Andre succesed to take the floor but she still successed to keep the turns. So, overlap happened when Andre intterupted by saying “terima kasih banget” until three times because he feltthat Agnes did not hear his utterance, because they were talk in same times.
Sule: Katanya ngefans banget? silahkan ngobrol mumpung ada.
Maya: Iya kang Sule ngefans banget.
(D.24/E.1/T.19:53 – 19:56)
42
conversation, the interruption produced by Maya as the assistant in Sule’s house. In this case, overlap interruption happened when Maya tried to take the floor but Sule still keptturn and finished the utterance. Maya took the floor to interrupt Sule’s utterance because Maya wanted to answer Sule’s question, she said “iya kang Sule ngefans banget”, but Sule still completed his utterance and finished it by saying “silahkan ngobrol mumpung ada”, so they were talk in same times. Previously, Sule said “katanya ngefans banget?”, he intended to emphazise that Maya right’s like Agnes as the favorite artist. So, overlap interruption could not avoid because they were talk in same times.
Atalia: Oh iya ,kalau ehhh bagi saya sebetulnya namanya pertandingan pasti ada ada menang ada kalah gitu ya .jadi buat kita khususnya orang bandung nih dan bobotoh di mana berada yang penting “keep moving and be winner” jadi tetep bersemangat.
Sule:
Nah, betul.
(D.88/E.2/T.02:51 – 03:06)
43
emphasized that to never give up for Bobotoh and Bandung society because in competition there were the winner and loser. In this case, the interruption produced by Sule as the host in the talk show.
4.1.1.3 Butting-in Interruption
Butting-in interruption is the lowest frequency of type of interruption that produce by the participants in conversation. This type which occured in 7 times and produced by the participants in two episodes of Ini Talk Show on NET TV. Butting-in interruption infrequently produced by the participants in conversation, because this type classified into unsuccessful interruption. Butting-in interruption happened when the interrupter tried to take the floor but the effortly failed. The interrupter could not speak completely and finish the utterance, because the current speaker still kept the turn and completely the sentence until finished the utterance without care for interrupter disruption. This type different with three other types, because there was no turn exchange in this type but simultaneous speech presents in the conversation. The following examples below to make the explanationclear.
Sule: Ini
Andre: Ini kayaknya kalau dilihat-lihat
Sule: Saya?
(D.18/E.1/T.15:59 – 16:01)
44
fashion. Then, when Sule wanted to explain about the picture but Andre cut Sule’s utterance to show his commentary about the picture of Sule’s fashion. Butting-in interruption happened because Andre interrupted Sule’s utterance while he still in one word. Then, Andre took the floor to show his responding by saying “ini kayaknya kalau dilihat-lihat” but he could not say his utterance completely. Furthermore, Sule could take the floor with the complete words by saying “saya?”, he intended to respond about Andre mean. Actually, this interruption happened because Andre wanted to give his opinion but he could not say completely. So Sule took the floor his utterance and finish it by saying “saya?”. It means that sule wants to clarify about Andre statement in the previous. In this case, Andre unsuccessful to interruption because he could not finish the utterance while interrupt Sule utterance.
Agnes: Ini, ini aku agak bingung ya soalnya selama aku hidup itu, teman aku gak ada yang suaranya kayak gitu, jadi ini mikir dulu
Andre: Mungkinkebanyakan
Agnes:
Siapa ya?
(D.40/E.1/T.37:24 – 37:37)
45
interrupted Agnes, but he cold not say his opinion completely because Agnes took her floor again. It was called butting-in interruption. This phenomenon happened when Andre tried to take the floor by saying “mungkin kebanyakan”, he wanted to show his opinion toward Agnes utterance, but he could not complete his sentence. It was cause Agnes tried to get the floor back and finish the utterance yet by saying “siapa ya?”, it was the word that she could success to finish the utterance.
Sule: Tapi pas waktu di tribun mah gak ada yang seru gitu ya semuanya kalau VIP diem aja.
Atalia: Nggak ada. Iya,
agak-agak
Sule: Ada yang di pinggir yang bawa ini Ndre kekeran gitu, teropong, terus, masuk, iya goooll.
(D.97/E.2/T.09:32 – 09:44)
46
4.1.1.4 Silent Interruption
Silent interruption is the highest frequency than butting-in interruption. Silent interruption which appeared 13 timed and produced by the participants in two episodes. This type did not include turn exchange but simultaneous speech presented, because the current speaker stopedthe utterance for a moment to may thinking about the word or sentence wanted to say, then the interrupter took the floor to help and find the word that his or her wanted and developed the conversation. Silent interruption was the phenomenon occured when the current speaker could not completely the sentence and paused the utterance in several times. Afterwards, the interrupter took the floor to help the current speaker needed. The interrupter gave the opinion and idea to help the current speaker for finding the word or sentence wanted to say. The following examples below.
Indra: Karena kamu duluan jadi naik duluan, aku belakangan. Terus habis itu dimarahin sama satpam;heeeh jangan lari, jangan pakek gitu-gituan kata gitu bapak (pause)
Sule: Kata satpamnya.
47
The conversation showed that Sule interrupted Indra because he wanted to help Indra for finding the word that he wanted to say. Silent interruption happened when Indra could not complete the sentence and pause his utterance for a moment, because he forgot about the word wanted to say. It is occured when he said “ ...jangan pakek gitu-gituan kata gitu bapak (pause)”. Afterward, Sule took the floor toward indra’s utterance because he felt that Indra needed to help him to find the word wanted to say. Furthermore, Sule interrupted for helping to find the word by saying “kata satpamnya”, it wass the word that Indra meant. So Sule very helped indra to complete the utterance.
Sule: Malu pasti.
Andre: Iya bener, Kang Emil udah “waaah, waaaah” begitu di sebelahnya cuman (pause)
Sule: Diem aja
(D.96/E.2/T.09:01 – 09:07)
48
The example above showed that Sule interrupted Andre to complete his utterance. The silent interruption happened when Andre stoped the utterance because he only acted to silent, but Sule took the floor to help Andre for saying what he meant, he said “diem aja”. It emphasized that he felt understand about what Andre meant without he said. Previously, Andre said “... Kang Emil udah “waaah, waaah” begitu disebelahnya cuman (pause)”, he paused because he only in acted of silent. So interruption done by Sule contained silent interruption because he wanted to help Andre’s speech about the last word when he stoped the utterance.
Table 5: Frequency of Functions of Interruption used by the participants in Ini Talk Show on NET TV.
Functions of
49
of the function of interruptions also. The most highest frequency was a cooperative interruption. Totally, the number of cooperative interruption was 66 uttered by the participants in Ini Talk Show. Intrusive interruption 46 uttered by the participants.
The most highest frequency from the subcategories ofthe function of interruptions were clarification. It appearsed 29 times in two episodes of Ini Talk Show in NET TV. The second position was an agreement which appeared 26 times in two episodes. The third position was floor taking with 21 occurrences. The fourth position was a topic change which occured 16 times. The fifth position was assistance which appeared 11 times in two episodes. The next position was tangentialization with 7 occurrences. then, the lowest frequency was disagreement occured 3 times in two episodes ofIni Talk Show.
4.1.2 Functions of Interruption
50
4.1.2.1 Cooperative Interruption
In the conversation, interruption could be cooperative but depended on the function. Cooperative interruption included the use of interruption in positive case, because interruptions were other oriented such helping a partner along more than self-oriented like sizing a chance to talk (Han Z. Li, 2001: 262). In this case, cooperative interruption happened when the speaker disrupted with coordinating on the process in conversation. Cooperative interruption intended to show the attention toward the current speaker utterance. The interrupter disrupted to help the current speaker needed. The interrupter gave the opinion or idea still in the topic of the conversation that the current speaker brought. Cooperative interruption divided into three subcategories with the different frequency. They are agreement, assistance, and clarification.
4.1.2.1.1 Agreement
51
Andre: ya ya ya, yang dari luar negeri itu loh! Iya, iya Nes
Agnes: Iya loh itu artis
internasional loh, tadi loh.
Andre: Nes, tapi ngomong-ngomong Sule ini harusnya di invite Agnes: oh, di invite.
(D.10/E.1/T.08:03 – 08:09) The conversation above discussed about Nunung as Agnes’s friend from abroad. Then, they conveyed the opinion that Nunung was a international artist. In this conversation, the interruption produced by Agnes (guest) in the talk show. It included in using interruption to show agreement.
The example above showed the interrupter which interrupedt the current speaker to say her agreement about the statement. Interruption happened when Agnes interrupted Andre to show her agreement, understanding, and support toward his opinion. Agnes showed agreement by saying “iya loh”. Furthermore, agnes said her opinion about the topic of conversation, she said “itu artis internasional loh, itu tadi”. It meant that Agnes had same idea with Andre and agree with his opinion, when he said “yang dari luar negeri itu loh”, it showed that international artist. Afterwards, Andre could take the floor after Agnes finishing the utterance, because she already to say her opinion.
Sule: Nah, Andre tadi ngebahas masalah
Andre: Iya, iya tadi ngomong, ngomong soal
masalah fashion. Sule: iya
52
The example above showed agreement interruption because Andre understand about what Sule meant, so Andre interrupt his utterance by saying “iya” while Sule still completing his utterance. To emphasizes his agreement, he say his opinion by saying “iya tadi ngomong, ngomong soal masalah fashion”. It is show that Andre agree and understand about what Sule means before he completing the word. Previously, Sule says “tadi ngebahas masalah” to conveys that in the previoushave been explain about fashion. So interruption done by Andre contains agreement interruption because he interruption to show his agreement about the current speaker opinion.
Sule: Berjalan aja lurus seperti air mengalir.
Atalia: Berjalan aja, iya nanti juga akan selsai kok.
(D.108/E.2/T.31:17 – 31:20) The conversation above discussed about the tips of Atalia when confront many problems. Atalia is Ridwan Kamil’s (the major of Bandung) wife. She explained that we are life must be easy going, because every people life has problems. So, every problems we faced like the water that flow. In this conversation, interruption produce by Atalia (guest) in the talk show.
53
4.1.2.1.2 Assistance
Assistance interruption happened when the curren speaker could not complete the utterance in the conversation. the interrupter took the floor to help the current speaker needed, because the interrupter felt that the current speaker needed a help to finish the utterance. Afterwads, the interrupter extended the word or idea to the current speaker wanted to say for completing the utterance. The following three examples of assistance interruptions to make the clearly explanation.
Agnes: kalau artis belakangan itu kayaknya, gak enak.
Sule: Gak enak banget.
(D.57/E.1/T.44:21 – 44:24) The assistance interruption happened when Sule interrupted Agnes to say the word that she wanted to say. Sule took the floor agnes’s utterance when she said “kalau artis belakangan itu kayaknya”, but Sule felt that she could not complete the last words because she gave a respite for going to the next word. Afterwards, Sule responded immadiately by saying “Gak enak banget”, it intended to help Agnes for completing her next words, but actually she wanted to say that words by herself. Therefore, she also said “gak enak” but rather late than Sule utterance. The assistance interruption produced because Sule tought that Agnes needed him to complete the sentence.
Sule: satu lagi? Agnes:(pause)
54
Agnes:Boleh besok gak? (tertawa) boleh besok gak? Emm... Love.
(D.85/E.1/T.01:10:53 – 01:10:55)
The example above showed that Agnes could not answer Sule’s question, she was only silent and tought about the word wanted to say. Assistance interruption happened when Sule took the floor Agnes because she could not answer the question. Sule took the floor to give for helping Agnes to find the word wanted to say, but he gave idea with his jokes, he said “Suleti?”, it itended to give she insighted to find the word that her meant. Furthermore, Agnes could take the floor again, after Sule already finished the utterance. Afterwards, she found the words that her wanted to say. Interruption done by Sule contained assistance because he felt that Agnes needed to help for finding the word which she could not say.
Atalia: Jadi waktu itu Kang Emil sampai buka (pause)
Andre: Buka puasa
Atalia:Bukan.
(D.94/E.2/T.08:05 – 08:11)
55
waktu itu Kang Emil sampai buka (pause)”, in the fact, she wanted to say “buka baju” but could not produce with smoothly. It means that she talkd about Kang Emil opened his t-shirt to give support for Bandung football team (PERSIB). So the assistance interruption done by Andre because he tought that Atalia needed him to help for finding the last words.
4.1.2.1.3 Clarification
Clarification interruption happened when the interrupter felt that the current speaker untterance necessary to clarify for making the listener understand about the messages that conveyed. Afterwards, the interrupter took the floor to clarify the sentence or word that the current speaker’s utterance, because did not understand about what she or he said. The interrupter intended to explain more detail toward the current speaker meaning of the utterance. The finding in this research found that clarification was the most highest occurence of the function of interruptions in this research finding. It occursed with twenty nine (29) times by the participants in two episodes of Ini Talk Show.The following some examples below.
Andre: oooh, ini yang dinamakan replikanya ya?
Yujeng: Replikanya siapa?
Andre: Replikanya pitbull tadi.
(D.5/E.1/T.04:58 – 05:05)
56
floor to clarification his utterance by saying “replikanya siapa?”,because Andre said before, the sentence was not enough to understand. So Yujeng interrupted his speech to make clear the sentence. Therefore, Yujeng successed to take the floor and get clear answer about from Andre, he said “replikanya pitbull tadi”, it means he describesd that Nunung look likes pittbull. The interruption done by Yujeng containied clarification interruption because Andre sentence was not enough to understand, so he clarified it until there was no miss understanding.
Sule: Itu Mi, saya mah mempertahankan Mi. Mempertahankan bahasa Indonesia bukan sombong saya mah, tidak bukan berarti tidak mau belajar bahasa Inggris
Agnes: Soalnya tidak bisa
ya?
(D.70/E.1/T.55:14 – 55:22)
The example above showed that clarification interruption done by Agnes, because she felt unbelieved with Sule utterance. Interruption happened when Agnes interrupted Sule while he still completed the utterance, because it aimed to clarify about his utterance. Previously, Sule said ““tidak” bukan berarti tidak mau”, his statement intended to explain that he wanted to study English but he wanted to repair Indonesian language first. Afterwards, Agnes took the floor to clarify his utterance by saying “soalnya tidak bisa ya?”. She thought that his utterance did not really to study English. So interruption happened to clarify it.
Atalia: Jadi eee ini saking sibuknya ya jadi Kang Emil ada saya nggak ada jadi kita cuman ketemu cuma satu hari ya karena Kang Emil kan waktu itu
57
Atalia:Dalam seminngu ini.
(D.99/E.2/T.13:18 – 13:29)
The example above showed that clarifiedthe interruption was very important produced by the participants. It aimed to clarify about the utterance which was not enough to understand. The interruption happened when Sule cut while Atalia still talked, because he wanted to clarify her utterance. Sule could take the floor because he was not enough to understand he utterance, so Sule wanted to make clear by saying “ketemu satu hari dalam?”. He emphasized that she met her husband only one day in a week , month, or year because her utterance was not clear. Previously, he says “... jadi kita cuman ketemu cuma satu hari ya”. In this case, Sule felt that the utterance needed to clarify from Atalia to get understanding more.
4.1.2.2 Intrusive Interruption
58
4.1.2.2.1 Disagreement
Disagreement interruption different with agreement interruption. Disagreement interruption occured to show disagreement or rejection toward the current speaker opinion. Both of them has similar reason that was to respond the current speaker’s opinion. The interrupter interrupted the current speaker because she or he showed disagree and gave the opinion or idea to the current speaker utterance. The interrupter took the floor intended to enthuse the current speaker utterance. Disagreement interruption which appeared three times in two episodes
of Ini talk Show. It included the lowest frequency than other subcategories of
function of interruption in this research finding. The following examples of disagreement interruption below.
Indra: Ini sudah luar biasa, ada lagi yang luar biasa lagi? Andre: Enggak, ini brifingnya Ndra.
(D.64/E.1/T.47:04 – 47:07)
59
disagreement interruption because he rejected about Indra utterance and has the idea by his self.
Indra: Sama waktu itu nyanyi lagu itu juga.
Agnes: Tapi jangan salah, terbalik pas lagi tralala trilili yang berisik nyanyi, ini.
(D.72/E.1/T.56:22 – 56:29)
Disagreement always happend when the participants disagree with the speaker said by doing interruption. The conversation above showed that disagreement happened when Agnes interrupted Indra utterance to say her opinion about his utterance. It caused Agnes has different opinion with Indra’s saying. Agnes showed rejection by saying “tapi jangan salah, terbalik pas lagi tralal trilil yang berisik nyanyi, ini”. She intended to explain disagreement and said her opinion that who was like singing and always noisy was Indra. At the first, Indra said “sama, waktu itu nyanyi lagu”, he gave opinion that Agnes loved singing with higher voice. Afterwards, disagreement interruption done produced by Agnes because she interrupted to show disagreement with Indra’s opinion about her.
4.1.2.2.2 Floor Taking
60
Ini Talk Show directly. It was normally happened in a talk show because
sometimes people could not wait the turn to extend the opinion. The following examples of floor taking interruption below.
Maya: Iya juga ya. Tapi entar Maya
Agnes: Waah, ini sabotase ini mau ngasih makanan basi. (D.26/E.1/T.20:45 – 20:49) The example above talked about the planning of Maya to cook for Sule, because she wanted to come in Agnes of launching clothing lines which realized in tommorrow. Agnes interrupted Maya to add her opinion when Maya still completed her utterance but could not finish it. Floor taking interruption happened when Agnes took Maya’s floor by saying “waah, ini sabotase ini mau ngasih makanan basi”. She emphasixed that it was a sabotage because Maya wantes to give spoiled food for Sule, it caused Maya was cooking a day before the events day, so the food would be spoiled. Agnes took the floor did not mean to change the topic of Maya brought, but she wanted to say her opinion to develop the topic of conversation.
Nunung: habis gimana sih, orang
Sule: Itu tadi Agnes perform sama dancer cowok semua dan cer
Nunung: Tuh, gak ngomong sih kang Sule
61
wanted to add each opinions. Floor taking interruption happened when Sule interrupted Nunung until she could not finish the utterance. Sule took Nunung’s floor because she coukd not wait for finishing her utterance, he cut and gave his opinion by saying “itu tadi Agnes perform sama dancer cowok semua dancer”. He emphasized that Agnes performed with man dancer not woman dancer. Sule did not intend to change the topic, although he cut Nunung utterance before he completing her sentence. It caused Sule undertsand what her means and he only wanted to develop the topic.
Agnes: (tertawa) ini sebenernya kenapa dia disini?
Sule: Sebetulnya indra bekti ini harus ke
hongkongkarena ada Agnes di sisni dia kemari.
